Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
Is Radcliffe's career ascent credible. Cant you plot it on a curve, and compare it to Kenyans that Stefan Matschiner used to blood dope. Those golden league athletes are on rocket fuel and blood boosters. Olga Yegorova may have been doing a program that was too egregious, but she was not doing stuff the others are not, she was just too successful eh.

It will mean something in Britain when the cyclists like Millar, Wiggins, Cavendish and Sir Chris Hoy, turn on themselves. File this one away to a "meh, sosdd"
 
Oct 30, 2011
2,204
0
0
The article there says the samples are stored for 8 years. Wish we did that in cycling.
 
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
One thing is for sure. Paula Radcliffe completely destroys the idea that the English could not do something like dope (or take a crap in a marathon with hundreds of thousands of people watching) because it would be too embarrassing.
 
Jan 10, 2012
368
0
0
gooner said:
Stop this doping only view of everything.

She has been vehemently anti-doping and consistent in her views throughout her career. She has even asked for her blood tests to be made public. Is that not enough for you?

Words cannot conceal that the fact that, among others, having the three fastest times in women's marathon in her possession is pretty astonishing for a white female. Bearing in mind the EPO and transfusion era, the rudimental or close to worthless doping testing in marathon (especially OOC with the altitude training in africa) and african women actually getting caught in later years ran a significant percentage slower than Radcliffe did, doesn't make it better.
 
Jun 25, 2009
3,091
0
0
Steve Jones set the British men's record at 2.07.13 back in 1985. Quite why this hasnt been beaten is intriguing as with better understanding of training, nutrition, you would think that someone of the standard could be running faster now, maybe 2.05? Therefore, need the race of someone come into it?

FWIW i always thought that it seemed like her body was meant to go very fast at a single speed, equals a very fast marathon runner. I'm more suspicious of people who are fast at a long distance but can also sprint fast as well.
 
Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
gooner said:
Stop this doping only view of everything.
I
GO
GULAG


She has been vehemently anti-doping and consistent in her views throughout her career. She has even asked for her blood tests to be made public. Is that not enough for you?
was not the phenomenon as a jnr. But she has this dominance, thru this british muscular christianity only the anglophones can know.

The fact that african distance physiques have a material advantage in dinstance and middle distance running, which would be manifest in records, seems to avoid your opinion, and her justification.

Records and wins, inandofthemself, do not provide evidence for peds. But, we have heard this spiel from Armstrong, from Wiggins, from many white, english speaking athletes, and they are ALWAYS afforded credit for their ethics, only to crush the public's confidence in them.

as GW bush said... Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.
 
Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
gooner said:
Stop this doping only view of everything.

She has been vehemently anti-doping and consistent in her views throughout her career. She has even asked for her blood tests to be made public. Is that not enough for you?
read this thread
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4158101&page=0

two posts from the first page
reasonable question
RE: Wejo (and others): Tell me why Paula wasn't a doper. 7/27/2011 4:29PM - in reply to Empiricism Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
given all the discussion about others doping, the lack of discussion about the POSSIBILITY of Paula doping is extremely noteworthy----the 2:15 is such an outlier--especially considering her pre-marathon international career, which was world class but certainly did not portend anything near 2:15-----i am a white financial biz guy, and I hate those who come on here and say race is reason the Africans are suspected but Americans not, under similar improvement circumstances, but even I have to admit that i nthis case if Paula were African the situation re:suspicion buzz would be quite different-----I don't know the truth, but seriously guys, if this were anyone other than a Brit or an American, people would be including the 2;15 in the discussion of the Chinese women's records.......is it unintended racism, blindness to what is obvious, or is it real?--not sure

But the folks who post on this thread as to imply they are offended by the suggestion, come on


Read more: http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4158101&page=0#ixzz21k5WgAa9
Buy your shoes from LetsRun and save 20% everday http://www.letsrun.com/save
reasonable question
RE: Wejo (and others): Tell me why Paula wasn't a doper. 7/27/2011 4:38PM - in reply to one take Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
a cynic could say she has been using the Armstrong playbook

1--Paula's marathon performance wildly disproportionate to her pre-marathon track PR's --- "she found her event" = Armstrong's body changed due to cancer, less mass, but same engine, so that is why he is so much better post cancer

2--Paula public vocal stance against PEDs = Armstrong Livestrong strategy---people just don't believe you can be such a phony hypocrite


Read more: http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4158101&page=0#ixzz21k5fLCuh
Buy your shoes from LetsRun and save 20% everday http://www.letsrun.com/save
 
Jul 8, 2009
183
0
0
blackcat said:
Is Radcliffe's career ascent credible.
I'm a Paula Radcliffe fan, but the answer is no, it is not credible in the sense of being a likely path of improvement.

That said, evaluating someone of this ability inherently requires such a small (and unusual) sample set that I am not inclined to consider the comparison data about improvement to be as meaningful as most statistical analyses would suggest.

The truth is we have no particular evidence to suggest that she is clean or dirty. To borrow a phrase from John Nance Garner, a history of making anti-doping statements is worth less than a bucket of warm spit when it comes to determining if someone doped.
 
Mar 19, 2009
2,235
0
0
If one were to take as a fact that white women have a disadvantage on the marathon over East-Africans, then Radcliffe must not only have been doping, but make Armstrong seem like a choir boy. At least white males are considered to be fast over a 3-week race. Radcliffe is in such a league of her own...

One could also say white females have an advantage in marathoning, and Radcliffe was the only to have really bothered to try her best, leaving a gap like that to the next white female.

Do we know how much all-out doping can win on a marathon, say starting with a clean 2:12 or 2:25 runner? Is it 2 minutes, 7, or even 10? I know it will vary from person to person, and few will find their optimal sauce mix.

As for mid-80's, weren't English speakers borrowing their brothers' or mates' blood in thos days?
 
Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
egtalbot said:
I'm a Paula Radcliffe fan, but the answer is no, it is not credible in the sense of being a likely path of improvement.

That said, evaluating someone of this ability inherently requires such a small (and unusual) sample set that I am not inclined to consider the comparison data about improvement to be as meaningful as most statistical analyses would suggest.

The truth is we have no particular evidence to suggest that she is clean or dirty. To borrow a phrase from John Nance Garner, a history of making anti-doping statements is worth less than a bucket of warm spit when it comes to determining if someone doped.
I dont care if she is doping, I dont seek to deny her liberty. As long as she hurts no one, and she is not hurt in the hormone regime, go ahead.

And reap the rich rewards in the london commercial atmosphere with the endorsements.

I have no problems with that. But dont BS me folks.
 
Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
gooner said:
Why are you bringing in this anglophone race theme into the discussion? I don't judge people along those lines so I don't know where you are going with that one and I don't like it being brought in here now. I judge its case on its own merits and I don't look at a person's passport when doing it so you can stop this strawmanning.
its less you. not a personal polemic and allegation to you gooner.

It is institutional. We dont see it, we dont consciously invoke these reasons. But to deny they are not present...
 
It may seem counter intuitive, but the existence of her sensational performance lead my perception of her to be clean. The "path of improvement" is one of inconsistency and frequent failures, spattered with successes. That inconstancy and prominence of failure is more familiar, and rings as a much more human development. No sophisticated doping program could mock the very real unpredictability of top level performance, and no program would allow it to happen.

I'm not sure if I was able to convey my feelings well enough so far, but put simply, a look at her whole career demonstrates more humanity than any other world leader in athletics. No records for consecutive titles, no era of dominance, no consistency at all really, which we have become accustomed to in more super-human performers.
 
Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
gooner, name one athlete who goes to these doctors, who is NOT a doper.

The Munich medicine man, renowned for using such unorthodox ingredients as the crest of cockerels and the blood of goat
 
Mar 10, 2009
220
0
0
Unfortunately for Nilsson and others like him all winners are labelled dope cheats. Very sad. It is said that when people can achieve nothing themselves then they put everyone else down. Here we have some prime examples.
 
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
ianfra said:
Unfortunately for Nilsson and others like him all winners are labelled dope cheats. Very sad. It is said that when people can achieve nothing themselves then they put everyone else down. Here we have some prime examples.
I suggest we produce a definitive list of apologist/trollboy talking points, each labeled with a number. It will make things so much easier. The time to post the above quote will be reduced to the time it takes to write, "Point #6. Point #11." It could even be shortened to, "#6 #11"
 
Jun 18, 2012
154
0
0
The simple fact is in any power or endurance sport, if you are beating the dopers, and there are always dopers at the highest levels, you're doping too.

There are no supermen/women.
 
Mar 11, 2009
1,896
0
0
PedalPusher said:
The simple fact is in any power or endurance sport, if you are beating the dopers, and there are always dopers at the highest levels, you're doping too.

There are no supermen/women.
This is not true.

Outstanding performance is not proof of doping. obviously we have a right to ask questions when we see great performance but we are truly lost if we convince ourselves that every great performance is as a result of doping.

The simple fact is that this argument is deeply flawed and certainly not true.

T
 
Good to know that we can at least have the right to raise our collective eyebrows at a 2:15 marathon.

I don't recall the specifics, but IIRC that 2:15 is closer to the "theoretical limit" than the 2:03 or whatever it is now for the men. Or at least times ran by Radcliffe are.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS